Contact: Nick Richardson, ext 5429

1. Summary

1.1 The following decision is sought:

That, following the public consultation exercise undertaken in late 2002, the following be taken forward for implementation following further design work:

(i) alterations to provide appropriate speed limits;

(ii) improved street lighting;

(iii) improved signing for pedestrians and cyclists;

(iv) new bus shelters and raised kerbs at stops;

(v) consider the introduction of traffic signals at Romsey Road/Chilbolton Avenue junction (to be considered following consultation on detailed design);

(vi) junction treatments at St James' Lane, Hospital entrances and Queens Road; and

(vii) implementation of measures on the north side of Romsey Road (alongside Winchester Community Prison) to deter walking on the narrow footway for safety reasons and to allow improvements on the south side.

2. Reason

2.1 The proposals are included in the Winchester Movement and Access Plan and promote walking, cycling and public transport use. The measures proposed complement the Personalised Journey Planning project being undertaken in partnership with employers in the Romsey Road corridor.

2.2 The attached report was considered by the Winchester Movement and Access Plan Joint Members' Panel on 4 March 2003, which agreed the above recommendation. Funding from the capital programme of £50,000 for 2003/04 has been agreed and it is expected that further funding would be allocated in 2004/05 or subsequently.

3. Other Options Considered and Rejected

3.1 A selection of measures was presented for public consultation from which the above items were selected. Schemes considered and rejected included an off carriageway cycle route between Kings Road and Chilbolton Avenue, a traffic signal crossing for pedestrians and cyclists at the railway bridge/Clifton Terrace/St James' Terrace junction and alterations at the Chilbolton Avenue/Sarum Road junction.

4. Conflicts of Interest Declared by the Decision Maker or a Member or Officer consulted - None.

5. Dispensation granted by the Standards Committee - Not applicable.

6. Reason(s) for the Matter being dealt with if Urgent - Not applicable.

Approved by: Date:

Councillor K B Estlin

7944X/NR

Contact: Nick Richardson, ext 5429

1. Summary

1.1 This report outlines the outcome of a consultation exercise undertaken in autumn 2002 regarding proposals for the Romsey Road corridor. The concepts presented for comment considered greater priority for pedestrians and cyclists, with improvements for bus users and revised junction arrangements to improve traffic movements. These concepts were initially discussed with key stakeholders and local Members prior to the public consultation exercise.

1.2 From the responses received, there was overall support for the measures to help pedestrians and bus users. However, there were mixed views on the proposed introduction of traffic signals and concerns were expressed about the possible introduction of new arrangements at the Romsey Road/Clifton Terrace junction.

2. Outline of Proposals

2.1 The Romsey Road corridor forms a key radial route into the city centre from Romsey and the M3. Romsey Road carries around 10,800 vehicles daily (12 hour, two-way flow) and provides a key route for bus services, cyclists and pedestrians. Several major employers are situated in the corridor, including the Royal Hampshire County Hospital, other health establishments, King Alfred's College, Winchester Community Prison and the Headquarters of Hampshire Constabulary. Travel to work by Hampshire County Council staff based in and around The Castle also affects traffic levels in Romsey Road. In addition, access to King's School and its impact on other movements is an important consideration. The corridor investigated includes St James' Lane and Sparkford Road (for access to King Alfred's College), Sarum Road and Greenhill Road.

2.2 A number of measures are proposed to improve conditions in particular for pedestrians and cyclists, including the following:

(i) signal controlled pedestrian and cycle crossing of Romsey Road at the St James' Terrace/Clifton Terrace junction with alternate working from Romsey Road traffic to create wider footways;

(ii) bus stop on Romsey Road in the vicinity of Clifton Road to serve the Police Headquarters and new bus shelters at other locations;

(iii) junction treatment at the St James' Lane junction to improve visibility, together with footway improvements and alterations at the various hospital entrances and Queens Road;

(iv) review of carriageway and pedestrian arrangements in Sparkford Road (access to King Alfred's College);

(v) introduction of traffic signals at the Romsey Road/Chilbolton Avenue junction with cycle facility (in association with the proposed redevelopment at Chilbolton Court);

(vi) provision of new pedestrian crossing arrangements at Chilbolton Avenue/Sarum Road junction;

(vii) consideration of access arrangements to King's School from Sarum Road; and

(viii) revised speed limits to ensure appropriate speeds between Queens Road and Pitt roundabout.

2.3 People questioning when the proposals could be implemented were advised that, while some of the smaller measures such as footway enhancements could be implemented in the shorter term, other measures such as new traffic signal installations would take longer, possibly up to two years and were dependent on funding arrangements.

3. Consultation Arrangements

3.1 Local County Council and City Council Members attended a meeting on 19 March 2002 at which the initial proposals were discussed. A further meeting involving key stakeholders was held on 4 July 2002 so that ideas could be presented for consideration as part of the overall proposals. The main employers were represented, alongside interest groups and local residents' associations, and expressed broad support for the initial proposals.

3.2 A series of public exhibitions was arranged between 18 November 2002 and 4 December 2002 so that individuals working at key locations had the opportunity to express their views. Displays were located at the following locations over extended lunchtime periods, with staff available to explain the proposals and answer questions:

(i) Hampshire County Council (for Members and staff);

(ii) King Alfred's College (for staff and students);

(iii) Hampshire Constabulary Headquarters;

(iv) Winchester Community Prison;

(v) Royal Hampshire County Hospital; and

(vi) King's School.

3.3 Questionnaires were made available so that people could express their views. In addition, information was made available on the County Council's web-site (see attached plans) and an electronic questionnaire facility was provided.

4. Outcome of Consultation

4.1 Ninety questionnaires were completed on paper and a further 241 electronically, a total of 331. This represents a good response rate for this type of exercise, around 400 people having visited the displays. In addition to the cooperation shown by major employers, people were made aware of the consultation via local media and by local County Council and City Council Members. A separate meeting was also held with representatives of the City of Winchester Trust so that views could be discussed. Fourteen written responses were received in addition to the questionnaire responses.

4.2 Overall, there was general support for the measures proposed, particularly those to help pedestrians. There were mixed views over the proposed introduction of traffic signals at the Romsey Road/Chilbolton Avenue junction, with motorists expressing concern that traffic queues would be worsened compared with the present arrangement. The proposed signals at the railway bridge, incorporating new crossing arrangements for pedestrians and cyclists, were welcomed by regular walkers and cyclists but concerns were expressed by local residents about traffic queues and the possible effects on access from side streets and fumes from vehicles.

4.3 The attached appendix indicates the responses and Table 1 summarises the questionnaire responses received.

Table 1

Responses to Romsey Road Corridor questionnaire (%)

1. Do you support the proposals?

Mainly support	Support	Neutral	Mainly do not support	Do not support
31%	16%	14%	21%	18%

2. How do you use Romsey Road?

	Pedestrian	Cyclist	Bus passenger	Car driver	Car passenger	Taxi	Other
Travelling to/ from work	15%	7%	12%	56%	8%	1%	1%
Travelling to/ from school/ college	31%	3%	14%	46%	6%	0%	0%
Shopping trips	22%	5%	12%	48%	12%	1%	0%
Leisure/recreation trips	24%	11%	9%	42%	13%	1%	0%
Accompanying schoolchildren to/from school	16%	2%	7%	65%	9%	0%	0%
Health, eg visit to doctor or hospital	36%	5%	10%	39%	11%	0%	0%
Other	26%	8%	7%	42%	12%	2%	2%

3. Do any of the following apply to you?

	Yes	No
Do you regularly use a child buggy/pushchair?	5%	95%
Do you have a visual impairment?	3%	97%
Do you have a physical impairment?	5%	95%

4. Please provide your home postcode

A total of 50% of respondents lived in or near Romsey Road (postcode areas SO22 4xx, 5xx and 6xx and SO23 7xx, 8xx, 9xx and 0xx).

4.4 The responses indicated that 63% of respondents were drivers and of these, two thirds drove to work, never using another mode of transport. Taking those people who responded as car drivers, the level of support or not support was broadly similar to the overall response.

4.5 A wide range of views was received on both elements of the proposals, issues affecting the Romsey Road corridor and wider transport issues. Many people took the opportunity to comment in the `further comments' section of the questionnaire while a number presented their views in letter form.

4.6 The most frequent comments (over 30 responses) were regarding the following issues:

(i) against railway bridge/Clifton Terrace traffic signal proposal (101 responses);

(ii) against closure of Sarum Road (east) at Chilbolton Avenue (51 responses);

(iii) support for park and ride (49 responses);

(iv) introduction of traffic signals at Romsey Road/Chilbolton Avenue junction (44 responses against, 11 in support);

(v) proposals will increase congestion (37 responses); and

(vi) public transport poor quality/too costly (32 responses).

4.7 Other issues raised included the following:

(i) concerns for cyclists;

(ii) use of public funds;

(iii) phasing of traffic signals and unnecessary delays;

(iv) scope of consultation exercise;

(v) drainage, paving and maintenance;

(vi) too many traffic signals on Romsey Road;

(vii) extension of speed restrictions;

(viii) dangers of turning from Sarum Road;

(ix) air quality and vehicle emissions from stationary traffic;

(x) concerns for pedestrians; and

(xi) possible impact on the beech avenue alongside Romsey Road.

4.8 A number of other suggestions were made, including reducing congestion and the impact of traffic on businesses, traffic associated with schools, the timing of roadworks, delays to buses and relocating the County Council offices.

4.9 Of the organisations that responded, the City of Winchester Trust emphasised landscaping issues and supported traffic signals at the Chilbolton Avenue junction and other junction enhancements. However, the Trust opposed the proposed cycle route in the beech avenue, partial closure of Sarum Road and traffic signals at Clifton Terrace. The Winchester and Eastleigh Healthcare NHS Trust has expressed its support for the proposals. King Alfred's College has indicated its support for improvements to Sparkford Road.

5. Progressing the Proposals

5.1 The consultation indicated that people had particular support for or opposition to specific proposals. The proposed traffic signal crossing at the Clifton Terrace junction raised much comment, mainly negative. People, particularly local residents, were concerned about queueing traffic despite the benefits for pedestrians and cyclists.

5.2 The proposed introduction of traffic signals at the Romsey Road/Chilbolton Avenue junction raised strong views with many respondents indicating concern about traffic queueing and the need to coordinate with other traffic signals.

5.3 The issue of the partial closure of Sarum Road was generally not supported as it was felt to be unnecessary. Again, pedestrians and cycling were not perceived to be important considerations by respondents who were more concerned with the impact on traffic movements.

5.4 It is expected that minor improvements could be implemented in 2003/04 with an allocation of £50,000 from the capital programme. Other elements, such as the installation of traffic signals at the Romsey Road/Chilbolton Avenue junction, would take longer to design in detail and programme. Funding issues would also need to be resolved. Further consultation on individual elements of the proposals would take place prior to implementation to ensure that people who may be immediately affected by a scheme could make their views known.

5.5 The proposals are linked with the Personalised Journey Planning Project under way and involving key employers in the Romsey Road corridor (including the County Council, Hampshire Constabulary (Headquarters), King Alfred's College and Royal Hampshire County Hospital - see agenda item 10)). This is a demonstration project match funded by the Department for Transport which aims to reduce car use by approaching employees on an individual basis. Transport providers are involved in the project which is to run until March 2004.

6. Conclusion

6.1 Consultation on proposals for the Romsey Road corridor was undertaken in November/December 2002, with the involvement of local employers and other interested parties. Overall, there was support for the proposals although a number of concerns were raised about particular schemes. Further evaluation can take place in the light of the responses received. However, the proposed traffic signal crossing at the Romsey Road/Clifton Terrace junction was not supported. A recommendation is required for each of the proposals as set out below:

(i) alterations to provide appropriate speed limits;

(ii) improved street lighting;

(iii) improved signing for pedestrians and cyclists;

(iv) new informal off-carriageway cycle route in beech avenue between Kings Road and Chilbolton Court;

(v) new bus shelters and raised kerbs at stops;

(vi) introduction of traffic signals at Romsey Road/Chilbolton Avenue junction;

(vii) closure of Sarum Road (east) at Chilbolton Avenue;

(viii) junction treatments at St James' Lane, hospital entrances and Queens Road;

(ix) implementation of anti-pedestrian measures on the north side of Romsey Road (alongside Winchester Community Prison) for safety reasons and to allow improvements on the south side; and

(x) controlled crossing and associated measures at the Romsey Road/Clifton Terrace junction.

Recommendation

That the Executive Member for Environment be advised that the proposals for selected schemes in the Romsey Road corridor be brought forward for detailed consultation prior to implementation.

7817/NR